cat person

cat person story nbd, who care, etc, but yeah the writer was lazy and could have changed a couple things

i've been waiting my whole life to say this sentence, but, Bongo Jongus otm

I just repeated a lagoon post tbh

great artists steal iirc

damn i hate all discourse about this story nearly as much as the story itself

krat person (a story about kratom)

yep very happy to avoid it completely (beyond this thread) xp

even this thread! in what way does this merit any thought at all!

brad extremely otm

sorry i've been really cranky lately

I think it's interesting

It’s salacious tho

.... all right

wasn't there a mad tv sketch where eric clapton tried to push ppl out of windows to write more hit songs

I get that sentiment totally, but I actually found the response piece quite moving(?) and worth reading on its own, even divorced from the original story, just as a reflection on the moment

(many xps to brad)

think it's a perfectly fine short story tbh

the ethics of writing about real people - in fiction or non-fiction - is something we're never going to get to the bottom of so yes, the discourse is a bit useless. but this essay introduces a possibly sensational and yes, as per treeship, salacious element which interests some (including myself)

The big question has to do with Charles. The woman in the story has now had her say—she was not some naive victim, and resents being presented as such. She has warm feelings toward her now deceased older ex boyfriend. But he is dead now and Roupenian’s letter strongly implies he did something that justified her representation of him. And we know he was bothered by this, maybe tormented. Was that right or fair? We don’t know.

y’all are weird i’m out

The big question has to do with Charles. The woman in the story has now had her say—she was not some naive victim, and resents being presented as such. She has warm feelings toward her now deceased older ex boyfriend. But he is dead now and Roupenian’s letter strongly implies he did something that justified her representation of him. And we know he was bothered by this, maybe tormented. Was that right or fair? We don’t know.

― treeship., Thursday, July 8, 2021 10:09 AM (twelve minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

everyone he knew, even acquaintances, would be aware that he was cat person also. which depending on how he actually acted towards roupenian could be a kind of "just desserts", or you know, could've been an unjustified nightmare

Roupenian’s letter strongly implies he did something that justified her representation of him

I don't really see that this is strongly implied by the quotes in the Slate piece.

I mean she doesn’t say she understands how hard it was for him, just her

Emil.y otm — that’s why it resonated when it came out

And while I don't rate the story very highly, it's relatable for a lot of people because those experiences have been had by a lot of people. It could be anyone.

And she said they had an “encounter.” Kind of an ominous phrase.

Cp

I swear to God, in the waiting room where I’m reading the Cat Person article, there’s an episode of The Golden Girls playing where Blanche is angry that a character in a novel is based on her pic.twitter.com/Egs0Ple298

— David Burr Gerrard (@DBGerrard) July 8, 2021

Xp sry

It's sprinkled that the story killed Charles, without accusing. Just leaving traces of anger.

It's a really good piece.

I guess I meant that I didn't see an indication that he objectively did something that would justify being represented in that way (which doesn't necessarily mean he didn't). I agree that she doesn't seem to feel bad for him (which could possibly mean that he 'deserved' it). xps Not sure I get ominousness from the word "encounter" either but I'm p out of touch.

xp

If he didn’t treat Roupenian poorly, it is pretty inexcusable for her to have made him into an easily identifiable symbol of a groomer.

As jim said, his friends and acquaintances would have recognized him based on the details in the story.

One should only base fictional characters on people who don't really exist, like message board posters.

I think you should disguise it better. Simon’s point from above.

With Treeship on this.

People can base fictional characters on anything they want and people who become the basis for characters can respond accordingly based on how they feel about it.xps

I also think it should be disguised better bc otherwise you’re exploiting someone else’s life which is cruel, or at the very least grossly insensitive to the feelings of other people.

If he didn’t treat Roupenian poorly, it is pretty inexcusable for her to have made him into an easily identifiable symbol of a groomer.

We don't know anything about how he treated Roupenian but it does seem fairly certain that he was not a groomer with her as she was not young at the time of their 'encounter'. (She moved to Michigan for her MFA degree.)

Would anyone have a different perspective if Charles had had some kind of public profile? That by "exposing himself" expectations of privacy were different?

lag∞n is right

― Bongo Jongus, Thursday, July 8, 2021 12:32 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

otm

I would probably be more critical if he were a public figure.

deeply pleased that the bewildered subject of Cat Person is, herself, a talented writer and perceiver

— Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) July 8, 2021

LL and lag∞n otm

in my limited, mostly school-years experience of writing fiction and creative nonfiction, it’s a lot easier to use small details from real people to sketch more interesting characters, but not changing easily-identifiable details is pretty bad

by default I’d always assume that a character in fiction, if based on anyone, is more of a composite than a single identifiable person. if you can pin 80% of the description of a character on a real person, you’re going to always wonder about that 20% that’s the writer’s exposition and internal monologue, especially if you’re the person who is seemingly identifiable

fwiw the response piece is I think better written than the original story, or at least my memory of it

the way she writes about reading "cat person" and having it possibly influence her own recollection / judgment of events etc was really nicely observed I thought

Apparently she is a publicist at FS&G.

why is her 9,000 person hometown in here this is goofy pic.twitter.com/Dp80gbYFhv

— bean 🌻 (@christapeterso) July 8, 2021

yikes

That person's thread seems OTM.

saline for the tears i cried